.jpg)
Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
In a message dated 5/7/2011 3:44:33 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
sblever@leverlaw.com writes:
No cases I know of. The research I did was over 10 years ago. But it
seems to me that even a refinance can be to pay the purchase price. Thepurchase price never changes, and to at least that extent I dont see why the
borrower should lose the nonrecourse protection up to the purchase price
just because he or she refinanced it.
P L
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 7:21 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
Not 100% sure, but the statute seems clear where it state "a loan which
was in fact used to pay all or part of the purchase price of that dwelling"
I'm curoius to know if there are cases supporting your recollection.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa *
800-307-DEBT
____________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 6, 2011 7:12:12 PM
Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
Its been a long time since I did research on CCP 580b, but my
recollection is that in a refinance it is still considered purchase money so long as
it is financing the original loan amount. In other words, if you originally
financed $400,000 of a $500,000 house and your only refinancing the
current balance owed on the original financing, say the loan was paid down to
$350,000 and only $350,000 was borrowed in the refi then that still has the
580b protection. Is that correct or have I muddled it?
Steven B. Lever
_www.leverlaw.com_ (http://www.leverlaw.com/)
P L
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 7:06 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
Refinance takes loan outside of anti-deficiency statute, since no longer
purchase money. CCP 580b protection requires at least partial owner
occupancy, so that apparently wasn't available on your facts anyway. Sold-out
non-purchase-money second is recourse as to borrower and it counts in 109(e).
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa *
800-307-DEBT
____________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 6, 2011 6:56:26 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
LOL, well, of course now we have two competing theories...
Just to clarify, rental properties, in California, so anti-deficiency,
re-fi's, non-purchase. We know under the one-action rule, the first that
foreclosed got their property, and so they're done. That leaves $300,000 second
which got nothing, and which hasn't uttered word one...yet.
wrote:
>
> Settle something to get below 109(e) debt limit? Perhaps a 1099c
is on the way?
>
> If not purchase money in an anti-deficiency state, note is in default,
> and collateral is gone, then I believe the debt isand
> liquidated.
>
>
> Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
> The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> To: _cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com)
> Sent: Fri, May 6, 2011 4:43:53 PM
> Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
>
>
> In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so
let's put
> him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties that
> foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with
the other
> debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit almost byitself.
> However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any indication as toif and
> when they will, although its clear that they could. How does that factorinto
> the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the guy simply cannot
afford to
> go 11. Is he out of luck?
>
>
> Todd Mannis, Esq.
> Calabasas, CA
>
Steve-
My understanding is that a refi does eliminate 580b protection. I believethis answer can be confirmed in pending CA legislation to restore P/M
protection (owner occupied residence) to the extent the refi is comprised of
the original loan.
Law Office of Eric Alan Mitnick
21515 Hawthorne Boulevard, Ste. 1080
Torrance, CA 90503
(310) 792-5864; 792-5866 (fax)
MitnickLaw@aol.com
In a message dated 5/7/2011 3:44:33 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
sblever@leverlaw.com writes:
No cases I know of. The
research I did was over 10 years ago. But it seems to me that even a
refinance can be to pay the purchase price. The purchase price
never changes, and to at least that extent I dont see why the borrower should
lose the nonrecourse protection up to the purchase price just because he or
she refinanced it.
From: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of P LSent:
Friday, May 06, 2011 7:21 PMTo:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt
Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
Not 100% sure, but the statute seems clear where it state
"a loan which was in fact used to pay all or part of the purchase price
of that dwelling"
I'm curoius to know if there are cases supporting your
recollection.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa
Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: Steven B. Lever
<sblever@leverlaw.com>To:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Fri, May 6, 2011 7:12:12
PMSubject: RE: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE
deficiencies
Its been a long time since I
did research on CCP 580b, but my recollection is that in a refinance it is
still considered purchase money so long as it is financing the original loan
amount. In other words, if you originally financed $400,000 of a
$500,000 house and your only refinancing the current balance owed on the original financing, say the loan was paid down to $350,000 and only $350,000
was borrowed in the refi then that still has the 580b protection. Is
that correct or have I muddled it?
Steven B. Lever
www.leverlaw.com
From: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of P LSent:
Friday, May 06, 2011 7:06 PMTo:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt
Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
Refinance takes loan outside of anti-deficiency statute, since no longer purchase money. CCP 580b protection
requires at least partial owner occupancy, so that apparently wasn't available
on your facts anyway.
Sold-out non-purchase-money second is recourse as to borrower
and it counts in 109(e).
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa
Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: t_mannis <toddlaw@dslextreme.com>To:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Fri, May 6, 2011 6:56:26
PMSubject: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE
deficiencies
LOL, well, of course now we have two competing theories...Just to
clarify, rental properties, in California, so anti-deficiency, re-fi's,
non-purchase. We know under the one-action rule, the first that foreclosed got
their property, and so they're done. That leaves $300,000 second which got
nothing, and which hasn't uttered word one...yet.--- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com, P L <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.